My Ridiculous Banning From Poker Forum

TelePaul

Uhmm has feedback ever been about anything other than posting stupid cat pics? I could probably count on one hand the number of issues that I've seen fully resolved here. PMing the mod is your best bet, other than that there's not alot that can be done. (Speaking as someone who's had their very own feeback thread degenerate into a sea of useless cat pictures!)

TelePaul

Gandalf23 wrote: »

I think this forum should be more tightly controlled ... there should be no place for ill-informed, patrionising, idiotic, and irrelevent comments and replies to OP ... especially where the OP has a legit concern and/or genuine feedback to give. If someone takes the time to post here they should be respected. Having said that, I know there are some fools and "fite da powa" idiots ... dont give them time or effort ... lock threads quickly after they have been given a reason they have been banned.

IMHO there are a few (a significant minority perhaps???) people here who have no interest in hearing constructive feedback, or making helpful comments (really, really good to see some of these finally getting banned at last ... see above). There are also mods who ban unfairly and seem to be on some warped power trip. We all know this happens and who they are.

very well said!

Gandalf23

TelePaul wrote: »

Uhmm has feedback ever been about anything other than posting stupid cat pics? I could probably count on one hand the number of issues that I've seen fully resolved here.

Sort of a pity that. Kinda negates the point of a "feedback" thread.

TelePaul wrote: »

PMing the mod is your best bet, other than that there's not alot that can be done.

I might be wrong but dont mods tell people with suggestions and problems to "take it to feedback"? I know I've been told that a few times.


Again I want to stress I'm not trying to "fite da powa" here. But imho Feedback needs a bit of a rethink from the "powas" at this stage ...

Fysh

Gandalf23 wrote: »

Sort of a pity that. Kinda negates the point of a "feedback" thread.
(snip)
Again I want to stress I'm not trying to "fite da powa" here. But imho Feedback needs a bit of a rethink from the "powas" at this stage ...

You have to bear in mind that you're addressing only one of the two reasons Feedback rarely works. Feedback should, theoretically, be about user's experiences of the site - whether that's new feature requests, highlighting existing faults, or complaining/querying about certain policies. Some stuff that come to feedback shouldn't be in this forum in the first place.

There are plenty of people out there playing the God Given Right card and basically complaining that they're being penalised for breaking the rules, under the apparent conviction that the rules don't apply to them. These people deserve to be laughed at, or at least to be removed from the forums whose function they impede.

Within the subset of Feedback posts dealing with mod behaviour and bans, there's a lot of noise compared to relatively little actual signal. If this were to improve, it might be worth tightening up the rules of the forum. But while the majority of the ban-related threads are still variations on "What do you mean, I'm banned for breaking the charter and ignoring a mod?!? ZOMG NAZIS!" I don't really see why anyone, whether it's the mods or the admins, should bother spending more time on regulating them.

5starpool

i just had an orgasm

---

the math turns me on. no seriously.

The above is the content of the deleted post by Ste05. It was posted in a theory thread that involved some maths calculations etc. The replies to this point were all serious, helpful and on topic.

There has been a lot of crap in the various poker forums as regards unhelpful one liners, and I believe Ste just got sick of it, and from a poster who rarely posts, to post something as pointless as this is not really the best idea. There are a lot of rambling, directionless, light hearted threads in poker in general and posts such as the above might be tolerated there, but in a serious thread it is beyond pointless. If he was a poster with a history of contributing then I certainly don't think it would have been ban warranting, but the fact that he is a rare contributor that felt the need to post this didn't bode well, and a message had to be sent, and all the other lurkers that read Ste's reply would have got the message too.

Yes, it is hardly the worst offence that has ever taken place, but if the serious threads can't be kept serious then the whole forum might as well stop being moderated. I have alerted Ste of the existence of this thread as he probably isn't aware of it, as he rarely pokes his head outside of poker.

Gandalf23

Fysh wrote: »

You have to bear in mind that you're addressing only one of the two reasons Feedback rarely works. Feedback should, theoretically, be about user's experiences of the site - whether that's new feature requests, highlighting existing faults, or complaining/querying about certain policies. Some stuff that come to feedback shouldn't be in this forum in the first place.

Agreed ... thats exactly what feedback should be about. Time for a heavily moderated "why was I banned form the 'xxx' forum" forum then?

Fysh wrote: »

There are plenty of people out there playing the God Given Right card and basically complaining that they're being penalised for breaking the rules, under the apparent conviction that the rules don't apply to them. These people deserve to be laughed at, or at least to be removed from the forums whose function they impede.

I dont agree. Its better ignoring fools than laughing at them. I would bet that many of the idiots posting here love nothing more that 5 pages of posts where they have a stage to perform on and a chance to publically "fight da power" ... gives them an audience. A fool loves an audience.

If "feedback" is to be the place to take banning issues, I suggest again that an smod / admin tell someone why they were banned and then lock the thread. There is no need to drag things out for 5 pages of stupidity and lolcats.

Fysh wrote: »

Within the subset of Feedback posts dealing with mod behaviour and bans, there's a lot of noise compared to relatively little actual signal. If this were to improve, it might be worth tightening up the rules of the forum. But while the majority of the ban-related threads are still variations on "What do you mean, I'm banned for breaking the charter and ignoring a mod?!? ZOMG NAZIS!" I don't really see why anyone, whether it's the mods or the admins, should bother spending more time on regulating them.

Agreed ... tightening up the rules in feedback is an excellent idea.

Also agreed on the mods / admins spending little time on debating bans. Did anyone suggest a "why was I banned form the 'xxx' forum" forum?
















Oh wait ... I just did ...

Ponster

Gandalf23 wrote: »

Agreed ... tightening up the rules in feedback is an excellent idea.

Also agreed on the mods / admins spending little time on debating bans. Did anyone suggest a "why was I banned form the 'xxx' forum" forum?



Oh wait ... I just did ...

+1 for keeping an extra eye on the forum but a mod *should* always ban someone with a PM that explains exactly why. In the case that the member is still confused after several PM's then a post in feedback would be fine but it shouldn't be the default action to get a reply from staff.

Mods who ban without explaining exactly why (though I'm sure it's 100% clear to the mod) and worse, who don't reply to members PM's asking for information on bannings should be 'retrained'.

TelePaul

Fysh wrote: »

There are plenty of people out there playing the God Given Right card and basically complaining that they're being penalised for breaking the rules, under the apparent conviction that the rules don't apply to them. These people deserve to be laughed at, or at least to be removed from the forums whose function they impede.

Well plenty of people are banned unfairly but seem to be ignored in the interest of keeping the peace. And it's easy to see why this is so desirable; if a Mod bans one person in a hundred, albeit unfairly, is it worth taking them to task over it? Is it even possible to take them to task over it? Probably not. Cat pics seem to be the preferred method of telling someone that, while they may have a valid argument, it wont be entertained.

AlmightyCushion

SetantaL wrote: »

OP has a legit problem,

People come and point and laugh at OP with lolcats and defining trolling. who gives a crap about the definition of trolling. This is making a mockery of the point of a feedback forum.

I agree with you here about the lolcats but the reason people were giving him a definition of trolling was because he thought that he was banned for reading the forum (which is what he thought trolling meant). We were just pointing out that, that wasn't the case.

Hobart

Yes he mistook trolling for another meaning, I think he accepts that and has moved on from it (although his fishing comment is ambiguous to say the least).

I also think 5starpool has given a fairly comprehensive reason as to why this occurred, he also says the Ste has been made aware of this thread. I find the poker mods to be one of the most level-headed types around here. If it's a mistake, I'm sure it will be undone. Just give it some time.

As for the cat pictures etc, they are as funny as a kick in the balls at this stage, and should warrant an instant ban if used again.

Ste05

Terry wrote: »

The post seems to have been deleted, so unless Ste05 restores it, or posts it here, we really don't know what happened.
Nothing in the reported posts forum either.

5starpool has reprinted the post, and has explained pretty much perfectly what happened. For non-Poker forum readers it's difficult to explain what's been going on lately in Poker, but it has become very heated over the last few months, in the Holdem HHs & Theory Forum and all the Poker forums, there has been a huge rolling fight between 2 camps, these 2 camps are the "Maths Players" on one hand and on the other, there's the "Feel Players". This thread was at a time just after/during one of these heated battles in a thread.

Whether it was tongue on cheek or not is debateable but TBH I don't really care, I wasn't willing to wait around and see whether or not this guy was a troll or was going to become a prolific constructive poster, the last thing the Poker forum needed was more posters who post worthless 1 or 2 line responses, and I didn't want another pitch battle taking place in that thread, so I deleted the post and banned the user so everyone can see that all the rubbish lately was being cracked down on (multiple warnings in multiple threads). For this I make no apologies, controlling people in the Poker forum can be very difficult, because of the topic. Ego's can become amazingly overly inflated based on their perceived abilities, and as everyone here knows they are the best Poker player and everyone should listen to them and it can be very bruising to have a post ripped apart and things get heated very quickly, hence why I wanted to nip a potential problem in the bud.

I then PM'd the user saying he was banned and the text of that PM was in the OP here. The last thing I needed was another Troll coming in stirring up the emotions of these 2 camps, if he wasn't a Troll he would take his punishment and come back in a week having learned a valuable lesson about Poker forum etiquette. I'm still undecided after a PM exchange and this thread, whether he is a troll or not, but my feeling at the minute is he is probably not a troll, just a newbie who posted the wrong thing at the wrong time. Although....Kashmachine, then sent me this PM, asking for me to phone him and explain why he was banned. Emmm, no!

is this some kind of joke? oddly enough i think you are serious. what kind of sh1te exactly are you talking about? and wtf are u in real life or are you just off a bad run and can't get tilt monkey off your back and decide to have a pop at me. i can't see why you would have banned me? my number is xxxxxxxxx and i would appreciate a call for an explanation. is this how you treat newcomers? if you want 'sh1te' and 'sh1te stirring' eliminated then you should consider banning half of the poker forum from what i can see. i'm gobsmacked.

I then sent him this reply:

It's no joke. Your post about loving maths and all that was worthless and added nothing to the thread. We have enough posters like that, and I'm cutting down on them from now on. So you're banned, post constructively or don't post. I don't owe you any explanation and if you think I'm going to go ringing you you, well I have better things to do with my time. Make a thread here if you want to give out about my modding. I'm cleaning up the Theory forum and your start wasn't good, so I nipped it in the bud. If you want to be a constructive poster, let me know in a week.

Ste05

I will still lift the ban in a week if he wants to post constructively and isn't going to hold some sort of childish grudge. I think this is more then fair.

Ponster wrote: »

+1 for keeping an extra eye on the forum but a mod *should* always ban someone with a PM that explains exactly why. In the case that the member is still confused after several PM's then a post in feedback would be fine but it shouldn't be the default action to get a reply from staff.

Mods who ban without explaining exactly why (though I'm sure it's 100% clear to the mod) and worse, who don't reply to members PM's asking for information on bannings should be 'retrained'.

I'm not sure if this was aimed at me or not, but as you can see, I did PM the user and have replied to every PM I received and have now posted in this thread explaining my actions. This will probably be my last post on the topic. But I'll keep an eye on the thread should any other questions arise that need answering.

Kashmachine, as I said PM me in a week if you want to return and post constructively in the Poker forum.

faceman

Ste05, his phone number is in your post, you might want to remove that.

Ste05

Forgot about that. Apologies.

Terry

Ste05 wrote: »

5starpool has reprinted the post, and has explained pretty much perfectly what happened. For non-Poker forum readers it's difficult to explain what's been going on lately in Poker, but it has become very heated over the last few months, in the Holdem HHs & Theory Forum and all the Poker forums, there has been a huge rolling fight between 2 camps, these 2 camps are the "Maths Players" on one hand and on the other, there's the "Feel Players". This thread was at a time just after/during one of these heated battles in a thread.

Whether it was tongue on cheek or not is debateable but TBH I don't really care, I wasn't willing to wait around and see whether or not this guy was a troll or was going to become a prolific constructive poster, the last thing the Poker forum needed was more posters who post worthless 1 or 2 line responses, and I didn't want another pitch battle taking place in that thread, so I deleted the post and banned the user so everyone can see that all the rubbish lately was being cracked down on (multiple warnings in multiple threads). For this I make no apologies, controlling people in the Poker forum can be very difficult, because of the topic. Ego's can become amazingly overly inflated based on their perceived abilities, and as everyone here knows they are the best Poker player and everyone should listen to them and it can be very bruising to have a post ripped apart and things get heated very quickly, hence why I wanted to nip a potential problem in the bud.

I then PM'd the user saying he was banned and the text of that PM was in the OP here. The last thing I needed was another Troll coming in stirring up the emotions of these 2 camps, if he wasn't a Troll he would take his punishment and come back in a week having learned a valuable lesson about Poker forum etiquette. I'm still undecided after a PM exchange and this thread, whether he is a troll or not, but my feeling at the minute is he is probably not a troll, just a newbie who posted the wrong thing at the wrong time. Although....Kashmachine, then sent me this PM, asking for me to phone him and explain why he was banned. Emmm, no!


I then sent him this reply:


I will still lift the ban in a week if he wants to post constructively and isn't going to hold some sort of childish grudge. I think this is more then fair.

I'm not sure if this was aimed at me or not, but as you can see, I did PM the user and have replied to every PM I received and have now posted in this thread explaining my actions. This will probably be my last post on the topic. But I'll keep an eye on the thread should any other questions arise that need answering.

Kashmachine, as I said PM me in a week if you want to return and post constructively in the Poker forum.

I'll just preface this by saying that I don't visit the poker forum, nor do I play (I tend to lose when I do play).

My opinion, even given your detailed explanation of the current situation, is that the ban was over the top.

Deleting the post and sending a friendly PM would have been enough.

What you are essentially doing is pre approving users in the way the soccer forum does it.

If you want to do that, then I suggest having an access request thread akin to that of the soccer forum.

Lurking doesn't really give you a feel for how a forum runs, so I think that newbies should be given a bit of leeway in all forums.

To summarise, I don't think the ban was warranted, but I also don't know the ins and outs of the poker forum and am just giving my opinion.

At the end of the day, it's your call (no pun intended). I just don't think he should have been banned.

---

Kashmachine, sending abusive PM's to the mod who banned you is never a good idea.
I recommend you apologise to Ste05 for that. It may just help clear things up.

tbh

I'd agree with terry, with the same qualifications. I think the OP was just unlucky, but the way he dealt with it, according to Ste05, shows a lack of class IMO. The ideal solution would have been an on-thread warning, but I think really that the onus is on the newcomer to spend a few days getting the feel of things before posting, and so the OP should have been aware of what was happening. It's not exactly a crime not to do that, but it would have prevented this whole thing. Again, ideally, I think once Ste05 had had a chance to cool down, a polite pm may well have unlocked the whole thing, but to be honest OP, if you had sent me the PM ste05 quoted, I would have banned you for longer. From the point of view of (new) users, it's hard to understand why a little quip can lead to a banning, but really when you expand it over hundreds of posts and posters, it grates. That's why I think the onus is on you to get the feel of the forum first, and why ignorance isn't an excuse. Out of context, you have a valid case. In context, You got it wrong, you won't again.

Overheal

I think I speak for most people when I say I'd have been banned a lot more often if this were the case but I've received enough in-thread and PM warnings to have a bit of cop on. In fairness most cases are best approached that way in my opinion.

edit: ah wow when did I outpost Terry?

Nerin

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

I agree with you here about the lolcats but the reason people were giving him a definition of trolling was because he thought that he was banned for reading the forum (which is what he thought trolling meant). We were just pointing out that, that wasn't the case.

as AlmightyCushion said he seemed confused about the terms,i wouldnt even have bothered posting if i had seen Almighty had posted the definition, except we both posted at the same time.

as for my LoLcat,it wasnt aimed at making fun of the OP,someone mentioned cats and iput it up (as an example) <plus OPs first cat pic>

Gandalf23 wrote: »

+1
IMHO there are a few (a significant minority perhaps???) people here who have no interest in hearing constructive feedback, or making helpful comments (really, really good to see some of these finally getting banned at last ... see above). There are also mods who ban unfairly and seem to be on some warped power trip. We all know this happens and who they are. Its equally as bad to be a "boards.ie fanboy" fool as a "fite da powa" fool. Both can be equally ignorant, blinkered, unhelpful, and laughable.

SetantaL wrote: »

OP has a legit problem,

People come and point and laugh at OP with lolcats and defining trolling. who gives a crap about the definition of trolling. This is making a mockery of the point of a feedback forum.

Kashmachine- have you tried to pm the mod? that is usually the first step. If you log out you can still view the thread so that should be that sorted for you at least.

Haven't heard the other side so can't comment but sounds like a harsh ban on a newbie that's being melted out for other people's general muppetry.

Emm right, OP was advised the calmly pm the mod,the usual steps etc ie dont get angry and personally insult mods or users,wait etc etc
i would think that since only 3 or four users were replying to OP at 2-3am that was freakin helpful.
its feeback and when people have this kind of query how many times do you see PM the mod etc written,its like unwritten rules of what to helpfully tell the OP.
Did ye read all the original nights posts?

as for muppetry/laughing at OP, the OP got Pi$$y when he though Talliesin was being patronising, and even was making fun of the fact he was helping!

KashMachine wrote: »

no, it's quite obvious that you jumped to the conclusion that i was mixing up the words trawl and troll and you decided that you were more knowledgeable in those regards and felt compelled to come to my rescue (read Freud on Superiority/Inferiority complexes to get a better understanding of what this could indicate about your personality). you know that game theory indicates jumping to conclusions can be very costly (lmao)!

meh, its easy to understand how a mod might think OP was a troll, low post count and unlucky choice of wording in thread seem to be to blame, even though he made trolly remarks/agro attitude in the feedback after people made the freakin effort to help.

Overheal wrote: »

I think I speak for most people when I say I'd have been banned a lot more often if this were the case but I've received enough in-thread and PM warnings to have a bit of cop on. In fairness most cases are best approached that way in my opinion.

true

OrlaBarry

The poker Mods do a superb job. Unlike some of boards the average poker forum user is not arsed with the internet par se bar how it can benifit them in poker terms. As such there are many dual+some accounts running around. That could have been Sol or a number of others. It was a call made by a mod at the time, just trying to keep a thread on track. No bigge tbh. The mods on the poker forum probably have to think harder than most mods given the tournies, free ads, rake back etc.

Just my opinion.

Ponster

Ste05 wrote: »

I'm not sure if this was aimed at me or not, but as you can see, I did PM the user and have replied to every PM I received and have now posted in this thread explaining my actions. This will probably be my last post on the topic. But I'll keep an eye on the thread should any other questions arise that need answering.

God no. It was a lame rant in an ill chosen thread. Sorry for the confusion

tallaght01

Ste05 wrote: »

there has been a huge rolling fight between 2 camps, these 2 camps are the "Maths Players" on one hand and on the other, there's the "Feel Players". This thread was at a time just after/during one of these heated battles in a thread.

Whether it was tongue on cheek or not is debateable but TBH I don't really care, I wasn't willing to wait around and see whether or not this guy was a troll or was going to become a prolific constructive poster, the last thing the Poker forum needed was more posters who post worthless 1 or 2 line responses, and I didn't want another pitch battle taking place in that thread, so I deleted the post and banned the user so everyone can see that all the rubbish lately was being cracked down on (multiple warnings in multiple threads).

It's pretty shocking to go making an example of a new poster, just to try and keep your regulars in check. If "2 camps" are fighting, why don't you deal with them directly? Ask for more mods if you think you need them.

Ste05 wrote: »

The last thing I needed was another Troll coming in stirring up the emotions of these 2 camps, if he wasn't a Troll he would take his punishment and come back in a week having learned a valuable lesson about Poker forum etiquette.

That's a dreadful attitude.

If I was banned from a forum for trolling when I wasn't, I wouldn't ever go back to it.

Ste05

tallaght01 wrote: »

It's pretty shocking to go making an example of a new poster, just to try and keep your regulars in check. If "2 camps" are fighting, why don't you deal with them directly? Ask for more mods if you think you need them.

It wasn't keeping my regulars in check, it was to stop a potential flame war. I don't know if you read the Poker forum, but that is the kind of post that starts them off. I assume there is something similar in your forum, although maybe not as the subject matter isn't something that everyone and their dog thinks they know everything about, solely based on the one time they correctly recommended Calpol to a mother of a sick child and it worked.

tallaght01 wrote: »

That's a dreadful attitude.

If I was banned from a forum for trolling when I wasn't, I wouldn't ever go back to it.

I don't know if you have flame wars in Biology & Medicine and how you deal with them, but when a suspected troll posts in a thread, I don't wait around to see if they were trolling or not, had the PM been more cordial and apologetic I would have lifted the ban sooner, but it wasn't and appeared to be a usual troll PM. Believe it or not I have banned loads of trolls and this is the kind of PM I receive, albeit usually with more profanities included and usually more personally abusive. Asking me "wtf are u in real life or are you just off a bad run and can't get tilt monkey off your back and decide to have a pop at me" is actually quite mild, but still not the words of someone that wants to constructively join in the forum.

Different rules are applied to different forums, I don't read Biology & Medicine and so wouldn't presume to tell you how you should mod it, similarly with After Hours.

Either way, if a mod thought you were trolling and banned you for it, if you didn't want to come back that's more your loss then the forums.

Ste05

Terry wrote: »

To summarise, I don't think the ban was warranted, but I also don't know the ins and outs of the poker forum and am just giving my opinion.

I think it was warranted, I suspected him of being a troll and so banned him accordingly. Whether or not he was trolling is debateable now with his detailed explanation, but his post and PM didn't convince me. A week long ban isn't that severe, had he not been trolling, I will give him another chance in a week if he still wants to post in the Poker forum.

I don't know how After Hours works because I don't read it, and as such I wouldn't have an opinion on how you mod it, because I don't presume to know the inner workings and previous history of the forum.

Terry wrote: »

At the end of the day, it's your call (no pun intended). I just don't think he should have been banned.

Your opinion is noted but my decision stands, if after a week he wants to return and post constructively he's more then welcome to PM me requesting the ban be lifted.

5starpool

I think there are a couple of things I should mention here:

1. Poker is a very busy forum and things can get messy very quick, even from an innocuous enough comment.
2. This guy is a new poster, and it doesn't bode well when one of his first contributions is the post he made that 'inspired' this thread. New posters are treated more harshly than the regulars that contribute, rightly or wrongly.
3. If things get out of hand then the fact that you might run into one of the people you banned in the real world a few days later makes it trickier to handle. Mostly it is ok, but there have been a couple of occasions that I would rather not have had happen. It is ok for the other poker mods as they are internet geeks though Therefore I contend that it is a trickier forum at times to handle than most. It also has a very high concentration of posters that rarely if ever post outside of the forum (or within my sphere of posting and reading anyhow).
4. This is the first feedback thread on poker that I can recall in the 16 or so months that I have been a mod, so we must be collectively doing something right. There have been some complaint threads of sorts within poker and there is one 'you are teh mean' thread started by me in there now as well, so we sort a lot of stuff out in house in the open.

I know I meant to say something else, but I can't remember it. Must be bed time in that case.

Edit: I remember now.
5. The main poker forum is treated differently with regards to those types remarks as well. It is more tolerated in there and there are a lot of obtuse and varied, some just loosely connected with poker, topics discussed there. The two theory subforums are not ones that should be cluttered unnecessarily with crass remarks.

tallaght01

Ste05, You're talking about trolling a lot.

Now, can I just recap. This is all coz the guy said the maths gave him an orgasm. Just to make sure I haven't missed something else?

Also, although I acknowledge our modding is pretty relaxed in biology/medicine, I'd be amazed if somebody got banned (or even warned!) for saying something like this after somebody explained, say, the pathophysiology of a particularly complex disease.

bluenose abroad

Ste05 wrote: »

had the PM been more cordial and apologetic I would have lifted the ban sooner

So basically if he kissed your a**e you wouldn't have banned him?

LuckyLloyd

OrlaBarry wrote: »

The poker Mods do a superb job. Unlike some of boards the average poker forum user is not arsed with the internet par se bar how it can benifit them in poker terms. As such there are many dual+some accounts running around. That could have been Sol or a number of others. It was a call made by a mod at the time, just trying to keep a thread on track. No bigge tbh. The mods on the poker forum probably have to think harder than most mods given the tournies, free ads, rake back etc.

Just my opinion.

I think this is a key point. There are a fair number of Irish players I have met who make an effort to log onto the forum to keep abrest of tournament / festival news. And then a percentage of those lurkers will also say that they find the HH threads useful or interesting - but that they wouldn't feel confident / arsed adding to the discussion. Often, when I have this discussion with the player in question it is clear that reading internet forums isn't exactly their thing - they force themselves to sit down and find the place because they hear it being mentioned at a game and figure they are missing out on something.

Some people that find the place will decide to contribute of course - but I would suspect that the poker forum has a much more equal ratio of regular contributers : irregular posters / out and out lurkers than most any other forum on boards.ie.

It is absolutely vital that HH threads are clutter / trouble free. The HH subforum is supposed to be a learning / serious discussion forum first and foremost (the charter for it clearly indicates this). Noel obviously was unaware that little jokes like the one he made just don't go down well there - particularly when there is stupid general squabbling running through a lot of the threads (which leads to the most pointless tail chasing and significantly reduces the useabillity and usefulness of the HH subforum).

One may argue that the fact his joke was nuked in the subforum means we are a bunch of up tight so and sos. Maybe that is correct, but so what. I'm for a HH board that is kept rigidly on topic. As such, I am all for Ste shooting first and asking questions later in the HH and Omaha subforums. The main forum is now a different story and more leighway should (and is) given there.

I'm sure the original poster will now realise that he can't feck around in theory threads. Probably it will mean that, even if Ste unbans him, he will have been left with a sour taste in his mouth and decide to leave us geeks to wallow in our internetz. Which is unfortunate as I would like to see as many players contribute to boards as possible - but maybe that is an impossible pipe dream.

Finally, the first few posts in this thread are ridiculous imo. "Feedback"?

Gandalf23

Ste05 wrote: »

had the PM been more cordial and apologetic I would have lifted the ban sooner ...

This is a disgraceful attitude.

Exactly why there are so many "fight da powah" muppets here ...

tbh

Gandalf23 wrote: »

This is a disgraceful attitude.

Exactly why there are so many "fight da powah" muppets here ...

bull$hit. This is a free service. If there were no mods, the place would be a sh1tehole. Is it too much to expect a bit of civility? If nothing else, it would have proved the OP wasn't a muppet.

Gandalf23

tbh wrote: »

bull$hit. This is a free service. If there were no mods, the place would be a sh1tehole. Is it too much to expect a bit of civility? If nothing else, it would have proved the OP wasn't a muppet.

Not bull$hit.

Civility is a two way street.

tbh

that's why the mod said he would have lifted the ban if the OP had sent him a civil post. You give a little, you get a little. It's how the world works.